MacIntyre v. JP Morgan Chase Bank,NA, et al

Filing 125

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 123 Plaintiffs Motion to Restrain and Enjoin Proceedings in Jefferson County District Court, Pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 7/25/2014.(evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02586-WJM-MEH
HOLLY MACINTYRE,
Plaintiff,
v.
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, and
the heirs, successors, devisees, personal representatives, and estates of any of the persons abovenamed who may be deceased, and Any and All Unknown Persons or entities who claim any
interest in real property which is the subject matter of this action,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on July 25, 2014.
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Restrain and Enjoin Proceedings in Jefferson
County District Court, Pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) [filed July 24, 2014;
docket #123]. Plaintiff seeks an order enjoining the state court from proceeding with a judicial
foreclosure action filed by Defendant on November 21, 2013, on the basis that the state action is
threatening this Court’s jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims. However, the All Writs Act is “a
codification of the federal courts’ traditional, inherent power to protect the jurisdiction they already
have, derived from some other source.” Klay v. United Healthgroup, Inc., 376 F.3d 1092, 1099
(11th Cir. 2004). In this case, the question whether this Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims
remains pending before Judge Martinez. See docket #117. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s motion is
premature and will be denied without prejudice. See Klay, 376 F.3d at 1104 (a district court may
properly enjoin state courts to protect the integrity or enforceability of existing judgments or orders,
rather than to protect its ability to prospectively issue one in a pending case).